GitHub 工程师揭底：代码审查常犯这 5 个错，难怪你改到崩溃！网友：差点全中了

Core Insights - The article discusses common mistakes engineers make during code reviews, particularly in the context of increasing AI-generated code and the challenges of reviewing it effectively [3][5]. - It emphasizes the importance of understanding the entire codebase rather than just focusing on code differences (diff) and provides practical advice to improve review efficiency [3][5]. Group 1: Common Mistakes in Code Reviews - Engineers often focus solely on the code differences (diff), missing out on significant insights that come from understanding the broader system [6][7]. - Leaving too many comments during a review can overwhelm the reviewer, making it difficult to identify the most critical feedback [8]. - Using personal coding preferences as a standard for reviews can lead to unnecessary comments and conflicts, as there are often multiple valid solutions to a problem [9][11]. Group 2: Recommendations for Effective Code Reviews - Reviewers should prioritize understanding the context of the code changes rather than just the diff, considering what might be missing from the code [18]. - It is advisable to leave a limited number of well-considered comments instead of a large volume of superficial ones [18]. - Clearly marking reviews as "blocking" when there are significant issues helps clarify the status of the review and prevents confusion about whether changes can be merged [12][13]. Group 3: Review Culture and Practices - Most reviews should ideally result in an approval status, especially in fast-paced environments like SaaS, to avoid bottlenecks in development [13][14]. - High rates of blocking reviews may indicate structural issues within teams, such as over-cautiousness or misalignment of goals between teams [14]. - The article suggests that code reviews should also serve as learning opportunities, fostering knowledge sharing and team growth [17][22].